Energy White Paper: Annual Report

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	The energy White Paper first annual report will be published shortly after the Easter Recess. This will allow the Government to report on a full year from the launch of the White Paper in February 2003, as we are legally required to do by the Sustainable Energy Act 2003, as well as to capture some key energy statistics for the relevant period. Given the importance of energy efficiency to delivery of the energy White Paper objectives, the Government intend to publish the energy efficiency implementation plan at the same time as the annual report. The Government also envisage simultaneous publication of the fuel poverty strategy implementation plan and the CHP strategy.

NHS Foundation Trusts

Lord Warner: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Health (Mr Hutton) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I have been informed by the chairman of the independent regulator of National Health Service foundation trusts that applications for the first wave of NHS foundation trust status will be considered in two groups. This reflects the complexity of a number of applicants and the rigorous approach to assessment that the regulator is adopting.
	Subject to assessment criteria being met, the first group will be considered for authorisation from 1 April 2004 and the second group of 12 from 1 July 2004.
	The first group of 12 are:
	Basildon & Thurrock General Hospitals NHS Trust
	Bradford Hospitals NHS Trust
	Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Trust
	Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Trust
	Homerton University Hospital NHS Trust
	Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Trust
	North Tees & Hartlepool NHS Trust
	Peterborough Hospitals NHS Trust
	Rotherham General Hospitals NHS Trust
	Royal Devon & Exeter Health Care NHS Trust
	Stockport NHS Trust
	The Royal Marsden NHS Trust
	The second group are:
	Addenbrooke's NHS Trust
	Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Trust
	City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Trust
	Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Trust
	Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital NHS Trust
	King's College Hospital NHS Trust
	Papworth Hospital NHS Trust
	Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
	Southern Derbyshire Acute Hospital Services NHS Trust
	The Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Trust
	University College London Hospitals NHS Trust
	University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust

Child Trust Fund: Draft Regulations

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Child Trust Funds Bill will ensure that every child, whatever their family background, will have access at the age of 18 when they begin their adult life to a stock of assets which they can invest in their future. The child trust fund will also help children and their parents to understand the benefits of saving and investment and how to engage with financial institutions.
	The Government are today publishing draft child trust fund regulations. These draft regulations will be of particular interest to potential providers of the child trust fund.
	The draft regulations include the requirements for a stakeholder child trust fund account. Every child trust fund provider will make a stakeholder account available as one of the investment options. A stakeholder child trust fund account will have its charges capped at 1.5 per cent per year, and providers will be required to accept all contributions of £10 and above. No charges will apply to transfers between different types of accounts, including from stakeholder to non-stakeholder, and between providers.
	The Government's decision on the charge cap is in the best interests of consumers, as it encourages as wide a selection of providers as possible to offer child trust fund accounts. A large number of providers will encourage competition and ensure the best value for consumers. The Government will continue to monitor that the level of the charge cap best meets the interests of consumers.
	The decision was evidence-based and considered the particular characteristics of the child trust fund. The economics of the child trust fund are very different from other financial products, such as the stakeholder pensions. In particular, child trust fund accounts will be smaller in terms of the average size of funds compared to pensions and will have a lower minimum contribution level than other stakeholder products.
	The evidence on which the decision for the cap was based included the report commissioned by the Government from Deloitte, which looked at the trade-offs of different charge caps for providers and consumers. Deloitte's report will be published later this year, at the same time as its report on the other products in the stakeholder suite.
	The minimum contribution for the stakeholder account has been set to ensure the child trust fund is accessible to all savers, including those who cannot commit to regular contributions. Providers will be free to accept lower contributions if they wish and it is expected that competition among providers could drive down the minimum amounts accepted.
	The Government will continue to work with the Financial Services Authority on the development of an appropriate regulatory regime.
	Copies of the draft regulations together with an explanatory commentary are available in the Printed Paper Office and the Libraries of the House.

Census 2001

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The 2001 Census national report (part 2) for England and Wales is being published and laid before Parliament today by the Office for National Statistics. Copies are available in the Libraries of the House. The report is also available on the National Statistics website.
	This follows the publication of the national report (part 1) in May 2003. These two documents are prepared under Section 4(1) of the Census Act 1920.
	The printed national report (part 2) contains tables on migration and on travel-to-work and workplace populations as well as new tables on members of the Armed Forces and on same-sex couples. The report is accompanied by a CD that includes all tables contained in either part of the national report at regional and local authority level. Copies are being provided free of charge to all local authorities.

Middle East: Israeli Security Fence

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: On 8 December 2003 the UN General Assembly in Resolution ES-10/14 requested the International Court of Justice to urgently render an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall being built by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory. In response to the request, the International Court of Justice has invited UN member states, Palestine, and certain international organisations to contribute written and/or oral statements to the court if they wish to do so. On 30 January the UK submitted a national written statement to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
	As we have repeatedly made clear, here and elsewhere, the UK considers the building by Israel of a fence, or wall, in the West Bank to be unlawful. The UK's written statement submitted to the court recalls that we voted in favour of UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/13, adopted on 21 October 2003, which demands that Israel stop and reverse construction of the wall in the occupied Palestinian territory. I regret that Israel has not complied with the General Assembly's demand. We recognise Israel's legitimate security concerns. The latest, horrifying suicide bombing in Jerusalem on 29 January only too clearly shows the continuing threat faced by Israel from terrorists. But building the fence on occupied land only complicates efforts to make progress towards a comprehensive peace settlement.
	Despite our view on the illegalities of the fence, we argued against this question being referred to the International Court of Justice. This approach is one shared by all members of the European Union including all accession states. This is being communicated by the Irish presidency to the court. The UK has also submitted a detailed written statement to the court arguing that the court ought to exercise its discretion to decline to give an opinion. Our arguments are about the use of the court's advisory jurisdiction. We believe that it is inappropriate to embroil the court in a heavily political bilateral dispute. We also believe the court should not be engaged where the consent of both parties has not been given. An opinion is not necessary to assist the General Assembly in reaching a view on the fence. Nor, in the absence of participation from one side, will the court have all the facts before it.
	Submissions to the International Court of Justice are confidential until the court decides to make them public. We expect the court will make the written statements submitted to it public at the start of the oral proceedings, due to begin on 23 February. At that stage, we will place a copy in the Library of the House.

Colchester Garrison PFI

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ivor Caplin) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am very pleased to announce to the House that the Ministry of Defence has reached agreement with RMPA Services Plc to redevelop and operate Colchester Garrison. This PFI contract will provide effective services to the Army for 35 years and is worth approximately £2 billion through the life of the project.
	This is an arrangement which is beneficial to both parties and we shall shortly see work on the new barracks starting on the ground. The result will be a fully serviced and modern garrison for a modern Army, with living and working accommodation that is among the best, demonstrating our commitment to providing our Armed Forces with facilities that are up to date and appropriate for the 21st century. I expect approximately 190 Civil Service posts to transfer to the contractor and these will be handled in accordance with existing legislation, We do not envisage any redundancies arising out of this transfer.

Reserve Forces: Employer Notification

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ivor Caplin) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	We are making an important administrative change to the recruitment and re-engagement procedures for the Volunteer Reserve Forces. From 1 April this year, new recruits to the Volunteer Reserve Forces and applicants for re-engagement will be required to agree to their unit contacting their employer about their membership. The purpose of contacting employers is to ensure that they are aware of those employees who are members of the Volunteer Reserve Forces and to provide information about training and call-out liabilities.
	As a safeguard, reservists will have a right to submit cases to their commanding officers if they believe that they have particular reasons for not having their membership of the Volunteer Reserve Forces disclosed. Cases will be considered on their merits.
	This change to our administrative procedures will enable employers to be in a better position to plan for the absence of employees who are reservists and to be better informed about their rights and obligations. It builds on our policy of recognising that the effectiveness of the reserves ultimately depends on a three-way relationship between the Ministry of Defence, the reservists themselves and their employers.

Armed Forces Pension Scheme

Lord Bach: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ivor Caplin) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Further to my Answer to the honourable Member for Aldershot (Mr Howarth) of 21 January 2004 (Col. 1244W), the proposals set out in the Treasury and Inland Revenue document, Simplifying the taxation of pensions: the Government's proposals, published on 10 December 2003, would allow all such pension guarantee lump sum payments to continue to be paid free of income tax, subject to the proposed £1.4 million lifetime allowance.
	The original Answer was incorrect following advice from officials across government, and I unreservedly apologise for this inaccurate Answer.
	The new Armed Forces Pension Scheme currently in Committee stage will in the event of the member's death, be able to pay both death-in-service lump sums of the type already paid under existing pension arrangements and the new pension guarantee lump sums applicable in cases of death in retirement, without any income tax charge. So, subject to the £1.4 million allowance, the rate will not be 35 per cent but zero.
	I have today written to the honourable Member enclosing a copy of this Statement.